Thanks!
Does this mean that lets say phone number is a pattern based restriction, you can't put the <restriction> here, say like
<element name="phone">
<complexType>
<simpleContent>
<restriction base="xsd:string">
<xsd:pattern ..../>
</restriction>
<attribute name="type" ..../>
.....but instead need to define a separate type?
Also what about defining the PCData for a mixed content complexType, is this definable?
----- Original Message ----- From: Sandy Gao
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] PCDATA Schema in complexTypes
Complex type with simple content is what you need. You can get one by extending a simple type. For your example, assume you have a PhoneNumber simple type for 555-1212, then you can
<element name="phone">
<complexType>
<simpleContent>
<extension base="my:PhoneNumber">
<attribute name="type" .../>HTH, Sandy Gao Software Developer, IBM Canada (1-905) 413-3255 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Dave Brosius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/30/2005 09:42 PM Please respond to xerces-j-user
To<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc Subject[OT] PCDATA Schema in complexTypes
Sorry for the off topic-ness, couldn't think where else to ask this.
With a schema definition for a complexType, can you define the simpleType part of it?
It really seems silly when the content is mixed, but if a complexType is only complex because it has attributes
i could see wanting to define the simpleContent part
<phone type="pulse">555-1212</phone>
how do you schema-ize the 555-1212 part?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
